SC Quashes Disciplinary Action Against Lakshadweep Judicial Officer: Proceedings Declared Legally Invalid

By Legal Wires 6 Minutes Read

In a critical decision that underscores the importance of procedural fairness in disciplinary actions, the Supreme Court of India recently overturned orders issued by the Kerala High Court to initiate disciplinary proceedings against a Judicial Officer from the Union Territory of Lakshadweep. The apex court found that the High Court had ordered the suspension and inquiry without first examining the necessary case records, rendering the entire process legally invalid. This ruling not only highlights the imperative of ensuring due process when adjudicating matters involving judicial officers but also emphasizes the necessity of careful record examination before taking any adverse actions. The judgment serves as a reminder that judicial integrity must be upheld through adherence to established procedures, especially when the reputation and career of a Judicial Officer are at stake. The case in question involved allegations against the Sub-Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate related to his conduct in handling convictions, prompting two petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution to be filed before the Kerala High Court. The matter eventually reached the Supreme Court, which carefully scrutinized the sequence of events and procedural lapses, ultimately deciding to quash the disciplinary action and restore the original petitions for a fresh hearing.

Background of the Case

• The case revolved around a Sub-Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) of Lakshadweep, against whom disciplinary actions were initiated by the Kerala High Court. Two petitions were filed under Article 227 of the Constitution by 11 convicted persons, alleging that the Judicial Officer failed to examine the Investigating Officer and did not provide opportunities for the accused to cross-examine witnesses.
• On 14th December 2022, the Kerala High Court adjourned the matter and ordered records from the CJM, Amini, Lakshadweep to be submitted in a sealed cover. However, on 23rd December 2022, without having received these records, the High Court directed the Lakshadweep administration to suspend the Judicial Officer and initiated an inquiry into his conduct.

High Court’s Actions and Review Petitions

• Following the 23rd December suspension order, the Judicial Officer filed two review petitions before the Kerala High Court. These were partly allowed, modifying the role of the Kerala High Court as the Disciplinary Authority for further proceedings.
• Dissatisfied with this outcome, the Judicial Officer appealed to the Supreme Court. He contended that the Kerala High Court had passed the suspension order without having received the requested records from the CJM Court.

Supreme Court’s Observations

• Examining the case details, the Supreme Court noted that the Kerala High Court had adjourned the matter on 14th December 2022 with an anticipated next hearing on 5th January 2023. However, this future date was not mentioned in the 14th December order.
• The Supreme Court requested an affidavit from the Registrar General of the Kerala High Court, which revealed that the records from the CJM Court, Amini, Lakshadweep were received on 26th December 2022, three days after the suspension order was issued.
• The Supreme Court remarked that the Kerala High Court had directed the Judicial Officer’s suspension and inquiry on 23rd December 2022, even though the records were not yet available for review, thus making the order legally unsustainable.

Supreme Court’s Decision

• The Supreme Court concluded that the disciplinary proceedings against the Judicial Officer were based on an invalid order since the necessary records were not considered at the time of the High Court’s decision.
• The bench, comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti, stated: “The adjudication of the matter on 23.12.2022, in the absence of the complete records being reviewed, would render the said order dated 23.12.2022 legally invalid and is liable to be set aside.”
• Given that the inquiry proceedings under Section 340 CrPC against the Judicial Officer had already been dropped, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and annulled the 23rd December 2022 order, along with the related review orders.

Directions for the Future

The Supreme Court restored the original petitions to their initial status and directed the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court to issue necessary orders for their expedited hearing. The decision emphasized the need for judicial bodies to thoroughly review case records before taking significant disciplinary actions, reinforcing procedural fairness in handling matters involving judicial officers.

Click to Read: K. CHERIYA KOYA VERSUS MOHAMMED NAZER M.P. & ORS. ETC., SLP (CRL.) NO(S).11916-11919/2023

Legal Wires

Team @LegalWires